|
|
Post by raptor patrol on Jan 14, 2023 13:29:03 GMT -5
Buy Sarah Spain. Sell Kate Fagan. For all you Around the Horn fans.
|
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Jan 14, 2023 13:49:10 GMT -5
Ill also add that spirited debate, vitriol, and having villains make sports more entertaining. Good luck posting on VT and saying an athlete entered the season out of shape. Or was a recruiting bust. Or seems like a bad teammate. And no national broadcaster dared to say that maybe it hurts a female athlete’s legacy to choose to sit out at the biggest stage. I think female athletes are treated like fragile beings that need protection and it hurts women’s sports. Just my two cents. You made valid points in both of your posts (I'm just trying to condense) I definitely could see her bias showing, but there were some points she made that were valid. Investing in the sport by promoting stories people can connect to would help. The B1G TEN media day at the start of the season was cool, but only seen on the B1G Network. Games like the AU game or showing Qualifier finals could also help. I'm basically saying, where women's volleyball is concerned, more investment in promoting the game definitely wouldn't hurt. This is where you and I most definitely agree. It seems like any scrutiny, levelled towards female athletes in any way similar to male athletes is almost automatically shot down. The amount of attempted censorship I experienced, when a certain incident involving voluntarily undressed athletes happened, was eye opening. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jan 14, 2023 16:07:13 GMT -5
Those sports don't have a benefactor like the WNBA does with the NBA I have never seen the NBA as "the benefactor" of the WBNA. More like the overlord. Back in the early 1990s a women's basketball league formed called the ABL. They paid their athletes enough money to be full-time employees, played a full-length season, and played during the traditional basketball season. The NBA, which had never before shown any interest in women's basketball, decided that professional basketball was their turf, so they decided to kill the ABL. They set up an alternate league that would only play a short season in the summer, using NBA's empty arenas. The teams were originally owned and controlled by the NBA teams. They threw money at the biggest name stars and paid much lower salaries to the other players on the team (the ABL had had a more flat salary structure that paid most players more than the WNBA but paid the big-name stars less than the WNBA was offering). And crucially, they used their TV and media contacts to freeze out the ABL from any TV money. Within a couple of years the ABL had to fold from not having any TV money and having to compete for big-name stars. At which point the NBA just kind of left the WNBA to get along as sort of an unwanted stepchild. Over the years the WNBA has established a little bit of separation from the NBA -- there are now teams that are pretty much disconnected from any NBA teams, but they are still locked into playing during the NBA's off-season (which is also basketball's traditional off-season). Anyway, the NBA was certainly not a "benefactor" of professional women's basketball. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jan 14, 2023 16:15:49 GMT -5
This is where you and I most definitely agree. It seems like any scrutiny, levelled towards female athletes in any way similar to male athletes is almost automatically shot down. It probably should be shot down for male athletes, too. But the ratio of interest in how female athletes look compared to how they perform is way higher than for male athletes. And so the counter-pressure to "shut down" such discussions is also higher. |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Jan 14, 2023 16:29:15 GMT -5
This is where you and I most definitely agree. It seems like any scrutiny, levelled towards female athletes in any way similar to male athletes is almost automatically shot down. It probably should be shot down for male athletes, too. But the ratio of interest in how female athletes look compared to how they perform is way higher than for male athletes. And so the counter-pressure to "shut down" such discussions is also higher. I agree with not objectifying athletes, although I don't hear a lot of protests when talking about Tom Brady's looks or other athletes with great physiques. I quickly got sick of seeing certain volleyball players shot from every angle possible, so I get that. |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jan 14, 2023 16:34:11 GMT -5
Those sports don't have a benefactor like the WNBA does with the NBA I have never seen the NBA as "the benefactor" of the WBNA. More like the overlord. Back in the early 1990s a women's basketball league formed called the ABL. They paid their athletes enough money to be full-time employees, played a full-length season, and played during the traditional basketball season. The NBA, which had never before shown any interest in women's basketball, decided that professional basketball was their turf, so they decided to kill the ABL. They set up an alternate league that would only play a short season in the summer, using NBA's empty arenas. The teams were originally owned and controlled by the NBA teams. They threw money at the biggest name stars and paid much lower salaries to the other players on the team (the ABL had had a more flat salary structure that paid most players more than the WNBA but paid the big-name stars less than the WNBA was offering). And crucially, they used their TV and media contacts to freeze out the ABL from any TV money. Within a couple of years the ABL had to fold from not having any TV money and having to compete for big-name stars. At which point the NBA just kind of left the WNBA to get along as sort of an unwanted stepchild. Over the years the WNBA has established a little bit of separation from the NBA -- there are now teams that are pretty much disconnected from any NBA teams, but they are still locked into playing during the NBA's off-season (which is also basketball's traditional off-season). Anyway, the NBA was certainly not a "benefactor" of professional women's basketball. I just mean that the NBA subsidizes the WNBA. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jan 14, 2023 16:39:55 GMT -5
I have never seen the NBA as "the benefactor" of the WBNA. More like the overlord. Back in the early 1990s a women's basketball league formed called the ABL. They paid their athletes enough money to be full-time employees, played a full-length season, and played during the traditional basketball season. The NBA, which had never before shown any interest in women's basketball, decided that professional basketball was their turf, so they decided to kill the ABL. They set up an alternate league that would only play a short season in the summer, using NBA's empty arenas. The teams were originally owned and controlled by the NBA teams. They threw money at the biggest name stars and paid much lower salaries to the other players on the team (the ABL had had a more flat salary structure that paid most players more than the WNBA but paid the big-name stars less than the WNBA was offering). And crucially, they used their TV and media contacts to freeze out the ABL from any TV money. Within a couple of years the ABL had to fold from not having any TV money and having to compete for big-name stars. At which point the NBA just kind of left the WNBA to get along as sort of an unwanted stepchild. Over the years the WNBA has established a little bit of separation from the NBA -- there are now teams that are pretty much disconnected from any NBA teams, but they are still locked into playing during the NBA's off-season (which is also basketball's traditional off-season). Anyway, the NBA was certainly not a "benefactor" of professional women's basketball. I just mean that the NBA subsidizes the WNBA. Not much. More like "subsidizes" them in the way that the state "subsidizes" prisoners by paying for jail cells. Any money or influence the NBA gives to the WNBA is to control them, not to help them. |
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Jan 14, 2023 16:41:25 GMT -5
Buy Sarah Spain. Sell Kate Fagan. For all you Around the Horn fans. Around the Horn has fans? |
|
|
|
Post by raptor patrol on Jan 14, 2023 17:26:07 GMT -5
Around the Horn has fans? If you count people who are just waiting for PTI. |
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Jan 14, 2023 17:27:36 GMT -5
Around the Horn has fans? If you count people who are just waiting for PTI. Haha. |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jan 14, 2023 18:43:04 GMT -5
I just mean that the NBA subsidizes the WNBA. Not much. More like "subsidizes" them in the way that the state "subsidizes" prisoners by paying for jail cells. Any money or influence the NBA gives to the WNBA is to control them, not to help them. If the NBA didn't subsidize the WNBA, I'm pretty certain the WNBA would no longer exist. Now, if the NBA hadn't got involved in killing that other league you were talking about, could it have survived 30 more years and still be operating today? Perhaps, but I'm pretty skeptical. |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jan 14, 2023 18:46:45 GMT -5
Buy Sarah Spain. Sell Kate Fagan. For all you Around the Horn fans. Around the Horn has fans? I haven't watched an episode of Around the Horn in at least 10 years, and 15 is probably closer. I do remember close to 20 years ago, I wrote an email to the producers of the show imploring them to fire host Tony Reali and replace him with someone better. I don't remember exactly why I did this, but I think I just found him annoying. Reali actually responded to my email and gave me his phone number and said to call. I figured why not, so I called. He was actually pretty nice, and I kind of felt bad for advocating for his firing. But I didn't really start watching Around the Horn more often either. PTI is still great, though. |
|
